National News

Right to Rehabilitation - Supreme Court

July 21 , 2025 16 hrs 0 min 51 0

The Supreme Court held that the Constitution guarantees fair compensation for such acquisition, but not rehabilitation beyond what is provided in law or specific policies.
It was a significant verdict on the scope of Article 21 (right to life and livelihood) in land acquisition cases.
The court also clarified that the state is not under a legal obligation to provide alternative land or housing to outsiders unless such rehabilitation is expressly provided under a policy.
When the land is acquired for any public purpose, the person whose land is taken away is entitled to appropriate compensation under the settled principles of law.
The name of the case was Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs Nirmala Devi.
Citing earlier judgments, including State of Madhya Pradesh Vs Narmada Bachao Andolan (2011) and Amarjit Singh Vs State of Punjab (2010), the bench asserted that rehabilitation is not a constitutionally guaranteed right.